Legal News

Mulling a Selective Prosecution of Michael Phelps . . .

By Dan Slater

For a while now, we’ve wanted to dip our toe in the Michael Phelps and marijuana story. But we waited and waited, figuring a Law Blog angle would emerge, if we were only patient.

Now comes the news, out of Columbia, South Carolina: The AP is reporting that the 23 year-old Phelps could face criminal charges as part of the fallout from a photo that surfaced showing the swimmer puffing from a marijuana pipe at a University of South Carolina house party. (Go Gamecocks!)

“Our narcotics division is reviewing the information that we have, and they’re investigating what charges, if any, will be filed,” said Lt. Chris Cowan, a spokesman for Richland County Sheriff Leon Lott.
“The bottom line is, if he broke the law, and he did it in Richland County, he’s going to be charged,” Cowan said. “And there’s no difference between Michael Phelps and several other people that we arrest for the same type of a charge everyday.”

Under South Carolina law, possession of one ounce or less of marijuana is a misdemeanor that carries a fine up to $200 and 30 days in jail for the first offense. Possession of paraphernalia is a $500 fine.

Phelps has not disputed the photo’s accuracy. He has issued a public apology, acknowledging “regrettable” behavior and “bad judgment” after the photo appeared.

We know what you’re thinking. Come on, Law Blog, not exactly a terrific legal angle here. Well, we beg to differ. In 2007, the Law Blog discussed whether it was appropriate to selectively prosecute Wesley Snipes because he’s famous. Judge Terrell Hodges, citing several cases, wrote “Since the government lacks the means to investigate and prosecute every suspected violation of the tax laws, it makes good sense to prosecute those who will receive, or are likely to receive, the attention of the media.”

Loyal LB’ers: Does Mr. Phelps deserve the same treatment?

Photo: AP

Full post as published by Law Blog - WSJ.com on February 03, 2009 (boomark / email).